Apple patent application describes iWatch… slap bracelets?

Time to combine wearable devices with technology from the '80s and '90s.

Remember slap bracelets? Remember how they could become deadly flesh-slicing machines if you removed the outer layer? Apple may be planning for the so-called "iWatch" to sport similar properties—hopefully without the flesh-slicing. A recently published patent application, discovered by AppleInsider and Patently Apple, shows that Apple has put some serious thought into the design of a wearable device—this one in particular resembling the slap bracelets that children of the late '80s came to know and love.

The patent describes a device with a flexible, multitouch display that can display things like text messages or other notifications. This largely matches the basic functionality described in recent iWatch rumors, though the patent goes a step further to describe a possible solar panel underneath the display for power, as well as a "kinetic energy gathering component, wherein the battery can be trickle charged."

Some observers thought Apple might simply build upon the iPod-nano-as-a-watch concept from 2011, but the slap bracelet concept from this patent application is what has people buzzing Thursday morning.

"The most recent widespread use of such a device was the slap bracelet, also called the slap wrap. The slap bracelet consists of layered flexible steel bands sealed within a fabric cover," wrote Apple. "Typical slap bracelets are roughly one inch in width by nine inches in length. In a first equilibrium position they can be flat. The second equilibrium is typically reached by slapping the flat embodiment across the wrist, at which point the bracelet curls around the wrist and stays relatively secure in a roughly circular position."

We can only imagine the build quality and durability that must be taken into account if Apple wants to actually manufacture a device that can be slapped—or at least gently flexed—onto the wrist repeatedly every day. It's important to remember, though, that Apple patents rarely end up becoming reality—at least not in their patent-described form. Then again, one recent iWatch rumor claimed there were multiple wearable experiments going on at Apple, so it's possible there could be several iterations of the same concept being developed.

A slap on wristband for an (expectedly) pricey bit of tech? So... anybody else foreseeing the inevitable news articles spotlighting how much running snatchers love to grab these off the wrists of unsuspecting victims? If we thought iPhone theft was bad...

So they are patenting the combination of a whole bunch of things that already exist?

Are you being facetious there? I couldn't tell.

This watch band concept could also appeal to an untapped market for those who like technology but still prefer to read physical books. Just straighten out the watch and you have a bookmark that can receive e-mail notifications and Facebook updates. Imagine, you can read Dickens and find out your friends cat just had her kittens at the same time.

Things like this make me dream of the day where I will have a device wrapped around my forearm that I hold out in front of me that brings up some kind of interface, which i use my other hand to type and access with.

So they are patenting the combination of a whole bunch of things that already exist?

Well, unless they have a physical example at this point it's more like they're patenting a wishlist. I'd think the patent system was less damaged if they required proof that the object they want a patent on were more than merely lines on a paper.

It's hard to read the description and not come away thinking "Game Controller". One on each wrist, perhaps one on each ankle... Wouldn't need the display functionality but all the sensing that gets communicated back would be insanely useful for game control. Or TV control.

Doesn't matter if it's Apple or Google or Samsung that's pushing stuff like this - it's just interesting. Limited, but smart, functionality that communicates with something smarter to do the heavy lifting.

If it's linked to your iPhone in your pocket or iPad in your backpack or MacBook Air in your bag, then carriers aren't necessary. OTOH, it may come both ways, like an iPad: wi-fi or bluetooth only; wifi or bluetooth (or both) with 4G.

I have not worn a watch since I got my first iPhone five years ago. yet, I have to admit I'd wear one of these in a heartbeat to avoid the hassle of digging the iPhone out of my pocket just to check the time, check a text, or get a notification, IF it's more comfortable, lighter, and less awkward than the typical watch.

Is this really patentable? There's absolutely nothing new about what I read. Just a relatively logical combination of elements. I didn't think of the slap-bracelet part, but had similar thoughts concerning flexible displays, kinetic energy and flexible motherboards. Admittedly, my idea included Velcro or Magnets, but that isn't that big a difference. And I came up with that idea in a bar. If I put even a week of thought into it, I'd be a huge innovator by Apples standards.My opinion is a combination of existing technologies should not be able to be patented, unless if they're like "woah, awesome".

This is the first time I've gotten a bit excited about the idea of wearing electronics on my wrist. I believe there is also some technology out there for generating power from movement that could be applied here to extend battery life.

I wouldn't mind having a waterproof iWatch to receive notifications and command/access my Mac, tablet, and phone while swimming or showering. Now that is hyper-mobile computing. Ecosystem computing unlimited. With advent of holograms, gesture input, and voice, wrist computing is way to go.

Are you sure this patent relates to future products? It could, just as easily, relate to future Apple employee monitoring devices, slapped on during orientation, and removable with a blowtorch by Apple security personnel one year after resignation, if you can prove you haven't violated any NDAs.

Things like this make me dream of the day where I will have a device wrapped around my forearm that I hold out in front of me that brings up some kind of interface, which i use my other hand to type and access with.

Just like Buzz Lightyear.

One day...to infinity and beyond.

There was a great TEDtalk where the presenter went through interface designs starting with a modified mouse where you could use your fingers to manipulate objects. By the end, he had wearable computers that would project the interface on your hand, the wall etc. and you could just move your hands to control things. I wish I could remember the speaker. I believe he teaches at MIT.

This is SO ridiculous. Smart watches for Android and other type of smart watches exists for years now.

So Apple takes things that exist already, combines them and tries to patent them as their idea?

Really, how they can be granted patents for this stuff? Then they are going to sue every other smart watch that exists, including the Android ones, on the excuse they invented the iWatch.

This is nothing for what patents where created. Patents are so supposed to be a protection of new inventions and ideas, not merging several things that exists and call it a day.

If we go that approach, then Apple had no excuse to sue Samsung, as they just took something similar and make it slightly different. This is exactly what apple does as well. Except they claim their inventions are original and unique.

Have none of you heard of the "morph?" Only one of several such flexible oled device that Nokia suggested 5+ years ago.

And the one with the self-cleaning nano screen? That was genius!

The only thing innovative here I see is allusion to the use of solar panels under the screen to extend battery life, which is likely because we've only recently started to see innovation in the area of solar panels that would properly support this mode of use.

And as for that, I can't even begin to guess how long I've known people saying "Why not put a solar cell on a cell phone, Calculators can do it!" (which is important, as such claims if we can find them written an verifiable makes this an "obvious extension of function" further nullifying the patent in its current form.)

Wasn't there a media scare about the slap bracelet's metal band becoming exposed and cutting kids wrists?

Yes, but they didn't simply become exposed due to a design flaw. It was due to the ingenuity of people who saw a fun fashion accessory and immediately tried to figure out how to make it into a weapon. I get a bit misty eyed thinking about it.